Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Better AI when?

danielcoh92danielcoh92 Registered Users Posts: 53
Please CA, this game relies on capable AI opponents to have any form of challenge and diversity in games and you've been neglecting this issue since day 1. The AI (cant even call those 50 lines of code "AI") is atrocious!!!

Please hire a 3rd party service to tweak it, make it competitive and follow the same rules as the player because obviously you can't do it by yourselves.

You can get your creativity from successful titles like Crusader Kings II where the AI follows the same rules as the player and subject to the same events and outcomes as human players. AI doesn't need to cheat to beat the player, it needs to effectively make decisions and react to events and other variables. Right now you have basic "AI" that does "X" when "Y" happens and relies heavily on cheats to success. The flowchart needs to have a lot more depth and variaty in it.

Let me give you a great tip - randomness can be very useful when creating AI and you seem to be ignoring it in Warhammer although it existed in Rome II and previous titles.

For example - the AI always make it's decision to attack based on it's chance to win. If you add some dice roll wether to attack or not and make the result influence the decision of the AI to attack or not then the AI might attack your army or castle even if it's chances to win are not greater than X. It will most likely lose but you gave the player a chance to enjoy a balanced fight once in a while.

I'll also address AI wargoals in wars against players or other AI factions:
Right now the AI will just throw all of it's army stacks together and attack you with 4-5 armies against 1 army or town. this creates very unbalanced wars against the attacking AI and most of the times results in the player quitting the game or loading a previous save game.
A player shouldn't cheese the game to win against unfair wars and the AI shouldn't attack the player with such massive forces all bunched together. This issue forces the player to either retreat, autoresolve and lose, load a previous save game or cheese the fight (abusing the non-existant AI) in order to win. NOT FUN FOR ANYONE and this behaviour shouldn't exist. the AI can and should react to the player having more than 1 army stacked together with bringing reinforcements but using forced march with 4 armies and then initiating combat with the 5th is just abuse of game mechanics and it creates frustration.
Instead, the AI can split it's armies (stacks) between multiple fronts and provide a strategic challenge to the player or god forbid actually reserve some troops to defend it's own towns against other AI factions or the player.

I won't address the battle AI because I think the campaign AI is way more urgent to provide a fluid and fun experience for the players.

To sum things up: AI should follow the same rules as the players, have the same events as the player and use it's armies in a smarter way and in general have a major goal for each campaign (based on faction alignment for example) and also minor goals that can shuffle every time you start a new campaign (like AI personalities). This can be achieved by rewriting the flowcharts for each event and decision the AI encounters while adding some RNG calculation to replicate the mistakes a human player might do once in a while and add tons of replay value to the grand campaign.

Please don't underestimate the importance of AI logic in grand strategy games. It has a huge impact on the game and it looks like you totally missed that area in Warhammer: Total War titles.

Comments

  • Sharazad87Sharazad87 Registered Users Posts: 282
    Would just like to add, As a company, you CA, *points* Made one of the BEST ai in gaming (Alien Isolation) I know its nothing like warhammer but it shows as a company you CAN do it.
    "Yes-yes! Kill!-Kill!"

  • MasariusMasarius Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 972
    Please, show some dignity and stop your ranting.

    Did you see the "50 line of codes"?

    This topic is well known. We all would gladly see some variations and improvements on the AI.

    (Just a note: People already complain about AI being to good when it comes to movement)

    Do actually have any kind of idea what developing costs? How much time it takes?

    You are the one underestimating things.
    Till shade is gone,
    till water is gone,
    into the Shadow with the teeth bared,
    screaming defiance with the last breath,
    to spit into Sightblinder's eye on the Last Day
  • danielcoh92danielcoh92 Registered Users Posts: 53
    edited May 31
    Masarius said:

    Please, show some dignity and stop your ranting.

    Did you see the "50 line of codes"?

    This topic is well known. We all would gladly see some variations and improvements on the AI.

    (Just a note: People already complain about AI being to good when it comes to movement)

    Do actually have any kind of idea what developing costs? How much time it takes?

    You are the one underestimating things.

    developing costs are not my concern man, I paid a lot of money for a great game with flawed mechanics that can be fixed (just like the turn times that got improved by 1000% since the release of the game).
    I'll just remind you that this game is a grand strategy game and although it has a very active multiplayer scene, is made for the single player grand campaign experience.

    I thought the AI issues will get patched as time passes and I was always eager to read patch notes to see what's improved and if i'll enjoy the game past turn 40 but I always get disappointed to see CA decide to patch a gashing wound with a tiny plaster.

    Very hard difficulty already ruins the game by making agents and public order obsolete for the AI and have no consequences for their actions (unlike the player) and to top it off you have a hidden anti-player trait that makes the AI hate your guts and refuse any form of diplomacy, declare random wars against the player and roam it's armies to the edge of the world to attack one of your cities or raid your territory. It doesn't provide any challenge to the player! instead, it causes frustration and makes a lot of cool mechanics like agents and rebellions useless.
    Just to remind you that because of this anti-player trait the AI will most of the time lose all of its towns while marching its armies to you. It seems to ignore the basic need of defending the other fronts or split its armies between multiple fronts. All it does is focusing the player.

    Regarding your note:
    the AI isn't "good" and i'll explain why but before I'll just note that obviously I didn't see any of the code but those patterns are so repetitive and easy to spot. the campaign just follows basic calculations and does what it does based on the result it gets which right now is either sack and forced march away or attack the player's town or army if it has high enough chances of winning. The result of those calculations will always lead to the same few outcomes possible and it will always be optimal. There's no RNG involved, no mistakes and it creates 0 opportunities for the player to actually have a chance of reacting to these actions. Unless you abuse ambush stance to lure the AI to you, you will most likely find it's armies reinforcing garrisons or looting your territory with your armies being too far away to respond in time.


    If this topic is well known and obviously it's a major and critical issue, why not address it? A grand strategy single player title relies heavily on AI and this seem to be the least of their concerns as they keep releasing new content without addressing those issues.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 25,186
    LoL, if this game had AI that was mimicking decent players, people would cry bloody murder.

  • ottakanawaottakanawa Registered Users Posts: 74
    Bro, they can't even post an update without filling the game with 2 dozen new bugs and you have half the community freaking out when you mention a bug or ask for improvements. Never gonna happen.
  • ottakanawaottakanawa Registered Users Posts: 74
    Masarius said:

    Please, show some dignity and stop your ranting.

    Did you see the "50 line of codes"?

    This topic is well known. We all would gladly see some variations and improvements on the AI.

    (Just a note: People already complain about AI being to good when it comes to movement)

    Do actually have any kind of idea what developing costs? How much time it takes?

    You are the one underestimating things.

    Virtually no reason for you to complain about someone asking for an improvement to the game.
  • subsphinxsubsphinx Registered Users Posts: 381
    Yeah, people can't handle playing MP . . . because it's fair and they get stomped. Good AI would at least stop those liars who say "I don't play legendary cuz the computer cheats." Yeah bud, I'm sure that's why. Has nothing to do with getting destroyed cuz you don't know what you're doing.
  • danielcoh92danielcoh92 Registered Users Posts: 53
    Threads like this on subjects that are important get to the bottom of the forums while nonsense about T-posing heroes gets the priority, what the hell is wrong with this community?
Sign In or Register to comment.